About your Search

20130124
20130124
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)
her outburst is not an outburst. it's a re-election flection of l think about this. if you were going to be real about these issues you would be asking what can we do to beef up the security. something gop members have already cut, you know, and they have decisions to cut it now in these days as we're speaking. it's rank hypocrisy. i think it's a fresh breath of air that people -- >> i agree with you about the hypocrisy because i remember 9/11 very clearly and i remember how this country rallied around a president who had limited ability but we all rallied around him. the first reaction was he says we're going to get the people who knocked down this building and everybody cheered him. they weren't saying how did you screw it up buddy. it was about unit. the left and center are much better at national unity than the right. the right sees a national tragedy like this far off in bengha benghazi, not in new york city, at a very exposed position which could have happened no matter how many troops he would there. we don't blame it on everybody even know it was new york right into the heart
and a number of senators as well. and to ask him directly about the elections and ask him about my second question. but i wanted to get your sense of where you see those lexes going. what efforts you can undertake to make sure that they are free and fair because they've been, i think, central to the next chapter in this transition. i just wanted to comment on that. the second question as it relates to afghanistan is one that senator boxer raised and her work on this has been exemplary, on women and girls and in particular, i have a -- an amendment that we got through the national defense authorization act which would require both state and defense to file a report on the efforts to promote the security of afghan women and girls just by way of itemization monitoring and responding to changes in women's security that will be part of the report. secondly, improving gender sensitivity and responsiveness among the afghan security forces and increasing the recruitment and retention of women in the afghan security forces. so both with regard to the election and women and girls. >> senator with r
's liberal agenda on gun control. jon: -pt president doesn't have to run for office again. he's won re-election. he has four years to get done what he wants to do. we heard in the inaugural address that he seems to have moved -- well he seems to be pushing some more liberal positions than he espoused earlier. you have senators like tim johnson of south dakota. mark udall of colorado, maryland drew of lashes all of the democratic senators, all of them from states that do not favor increasing restrictions on john sales. >> then also you have members of congress that are up for re-election, and some of these are blue dog democrats. when people go to the polls if they do not vote their conscience and vote for their constituents, people at the polls are going to give them pain of defeat. when it comes to god in certain states and when it comes to guns people do not go against the grain of what they believe in. so i think that the dscc and harry reid should stand firm and not follow the president's liberal agenda on this. but you do have a strong gun lobby in washington d.c., those mountainses for gu
is working and in fact, it wasn't working. it helped get this president re-elected by misleading the american public, but now, the chickens are coming home to roost and we're going to continue to pursue this until we find the truth. >> i want to ask you one other question based on what your republican colleague rand paul said today. it was a pretty strong statement. here he is. >> had i been president at the time and i found that you did not read the cables from benghazi, you did not read the cables from ambassador stevens, i would have relieved you of you post. i think it's inexcusable. >> do you agree? >> i'd say the issue is moot because hillary clinton is moving on and senator kerry's stepping up to the plate probably, so that's rand paul's opinion. >> do you think she'd make a good president? i have to ask that because 67% of this country view her favorably. her unfavorable is 28%. the president, anybody in this country, would die for that. >> listen, the people on the other side of the aisle aren't taking the fact this nation's going bankrupt seriously, so she's a member of that party,
time as we approached an election. americans are still entitled to be told the truth. did you select embassador rice? >> i did not. although i have not had a chance to testify, i have seen the resulting debate. you are right. it was a terrorist attack. what caused it? that is what we did not know. we did not know what their motives were. after months of research, it was made clear the picture remains still complicated. i say that because in the unclassified, i " key questions surrounding the identity and motivation of the prepared -- of the perpetrators remains to be determined. i recommend all staff read the classified version, which goes into greater detail. i cannot speak to its. it goes into greater detail becausebut where a variety of pl causes and triggers afford it. and there's evidence the attacks were pre coordinated and not necessarily indicative of an extensive planning. i personally was not focused on talking points. i was focused on keeping our people say. as i said, i have a very serious threat environment in yemen. we have people getting over that wall at the cairo, do
for re-election in 2014. >> do you vote based upon one issue or do you look at a variety of issues? same thing about the issue of choice. there are some people out there who say i am only going to vote based upon whether or not you are pro-choice or pro-life. those are single voter issues. when you look at polling data, you don't have a significant number of single issue voters in america. they are saying, hey, i might be for same-sex marriage or against it or pro-life or pro-choice, if it's about finances, i might choose a different decision. >> i want to thank roland for making my point for me. president obama is engaging in what we like to call hubris. george w. bush and karl rove thought they had a permanent majority. it wasn't that permanent. ronald reagan's majority didn't last forever either. the simple truth is the more successful you are when you win a big victory, it also means democrats are representing silicon valley billionaires and struggling immigrants in the inner city. you represent both of those groups, there are tensions in your coalition and that coalition you win one
. that is true. african-american women, 95%, for one candidate. white men, the elect had been held by white men voted romney would have carried 47 states that is fractured. you hear this inauguration speech talking about liberal buzzwords. i'm a registered democrat, take it from me, when i hear climate change in context of median income down 10%, i turn it off, i want to hear how are we going to fix this economy. you know you heard debates between romney, and obama, i will give anybody 10-dollars for every time they heard the wore growth. -- word growth, we're stuck with this pie, and how to distribute the pie. neil: that is what bums people out? they are not optimistic. >> they are responding to fact that we have something who may be gives good speeches but how can you lead? what are you doing? some are a little bit more hor full than others. but the bottom line, is you live your life every day, if you don't feel good within that life, you will feel more depressed and less hopeful. >> and the irony is the guy you are voting for is the guy that is leading you down this horrible path. where your
re-elected because people would have seen it as statesmanship and leadership. now, we have had an unfortunate set of experiences here as recently as the end of last year, new year's eve, because we approached a manufactured crisis, a deadline known as the fiscal cliff, but i don't think anybody in america certainly anybody in this body really wants another 2:00 a.m. senate vote. not because it's inconvenient but because it's not a good thing in the people's house, the senate house of representatives to be voting in the dark of night when people aren't able to watch. nobody wants another cliffhanger that weakens public trust in our government or in our willingness to meet our responsibilities, and most of all no one wants another credit downgrade. now, this is important. the president talks about the importance of lifting the debt ceiling because he said we don't want to suffer another downgrade in our credit standing, but indeed one of the reasons why we have already suffered a negative response to our credit rating is because we haven't dealt with the real problems that confro
of the most passionate ceos. liz: very passionate. he wrote op-eds. he gave us a live interview on election night in fox business. you know what? it is about all crucial it is to fix the debt. he is ceo of nasdaq omx, bob greifeld. good to see you, bob. >> good to be here liz where do we stand with fix the debt? any closer? >> i think we're disappointed how the fiscal cliff negotiations played out and we as ceos in ticks the debt said we were fine with tax rates going up on the wealthy, and we said that in the context of in addition, we should have spending cuts. we got one half of the deal. we're certainly hopeful congress and the president will go forward with spending cuts as they address the sequester and other continuing budget resolution issues that they have. liz: except of course we have this debt ceiling once again. are you optimistic about things? >> i certainly do not believe the debt ceiling is where these negotiations should take place. we have incurred these debts. we have the full faith and credit of the u.s. government should not be put at rest. we think the debt ceiling, be
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)